A US National Health Care System? Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : A US National Health Care System?

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Eric who wrote (24111)	7/11/2012 7:45:08 PM
From: TimF	3 Recommendations Read Replies (1) of 42652

You think just about everything is invented here? He didn't say everything was invented in the US, and that idea is irrelevant to the point. First of all its not an issue of everything, just pharmaceuticals (and probably medical devices as well). Secondly its not an issue of where things are invented, but of where the money comes from to pay for the research that develops the innovation. The fact that the US government makes much less of an effort to control drug prices means the US market provides a disproportionate amount of the dollars for newly developed drugs, even if those drugs are developed outside the US. This would be an even larger factor if it wasn't for the long and costly approval process required by the FDA. Being 37th in the world for healthcare here is nothing to brag about. Its also an unsupported, even silly, claim. (And also irrelevant to the above point, even if the US really was 37th it would still be providing the lions share of revenue to support new drug development) One clear problem with WHOs methodology is that it gives major weight to "health care equality", note this is not the same as measuring the level of care for the worst off and giving it more weight, if that was what you measure then improvements for the better off wouldn't hurt that measure, its measuring the difference, and considering a big difference to be bad. If you ranked quality of health care from 1 (the worst) to 10 (the best), then a country with 1 for the poor and 2 for the rich, would score much better on this measure than a country with 2 for the poor, and 10 for the rich, even though both get better care in the 2nd country. More at agoraphilia.blogspot.com agoraphilia.blogspot.com agoraphilia.blogspot.com econlog.econlib.org realclearpolitics.com nejm.org Message 25661057 Message 24680723 Message 24358529 Message 26443468 Message 26441390 Message 26442897

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next